@Riot, make first dragon stack give a %damage bonus, instead of %AD and AP..

Knight Devout··3 votes·1,201 views

TL;DR #In my opinion, switching the first dragonslayer bonus to increase physical and magic damage dealt by 6% would be a better solution for increasing the damage , and it would allow for more interesting team compositions, thanks to its impartial benefits to both fighters, tanks, or carries.

6%AD and AP effectiveness is directly related to how much AD and AP you have. This means that, for tanks who don't build AD or AP, or for supports, it's much less effective than it is for damage dealers . Sure, Nami Soraka and janna will have a bit less of shields/heals, but the first dragon slayer stack is supposed to promote damage. For damage dealers, it's almost the same. A Jayce that deals 6%bonus physical damage, or a Jayce with 6%bonus AD, it's still dealing more damage than a Jayce without neither of said buffs. However, the break-even point of damage between old and new will vary with each champion, but it's safe to say that, on average, champions with low ratio would benefit more , and champion with high ratio will benefit slightly less (once they have build enough AD and AP). This change would help fighters and tanks , increasing the effect that dragon has on them, with a small impact on other champions. even if 6% proves to be too strong in light of the base damage from spells, it would still be possible to tune it down while keeping the newfound balance with tank and fighters, like, decreasing the % of bonus damage or moving it down through the dragonslayer buff order(I mean, at which stack is unlocked).

For example, let's pick, Karthus Karthus's Lay Waste. it's damage (rank 5) and Ap ratios are 240+60%AP. With the new proposed change, it would be (240+60%AP)*1,06=254,4+63,6%AP. As it is on live, it's 240+60%AP, but you have 6% more ap , so your AP is 1,06 compared to the previous case. which means, the magic damage it's 240+63,6% Ap. it's a slight buff, but please note that the Ap ratios are unchanged. This means that regardless of how much ap you get, you have the same results as before. This means the buff is felt more by champions that don't build ap (the concept behind the change). However, since the extra ad and ap, the extra damage against turrets is lost. So it increases slightly the damage against champions (from base) but nerfs slightly the damage against buildings. Overall it doesn't shift the balance significantly.

However, this is a lot more effective for tanks. Let's pick a recently buffed tank, Sejuani, and compare the change. Sejuani W damage is 12%+3% per 100 AP of enemy max health on-hit. 160+12% Sejuani's max health+60%AP AoE.

With LIVE dragonslayer stack version. 12%+3,18% per 100 AP of enemy max health on-hit (the better ratio is a result of the %extra ap from the buff). 160+12%max health+63,6%AP AoE.

With proposed dragonslayer stack change. 12,72%+3,18% per 100 AP of enemy mex health on-hit. 169,6+12,72% Sejuan's Max health+63,6%AP.

Notice the change? The AP ratios are still the same, as there is no change between multiplying for 1.06 either your ap, or your magic damage (thus your AP ratios). However, for champions who don't build AP this damage would be a significant buff as it would increase their damage by a bigger %.

of course, since it's an overall buff this could make the dragonslayer stacks even more snowbally, but, as I said, this is not about wether the buff is balanced or not, but about how to make the buff more impartial and fair across all champions roles. If it proves to be too strong, it can be nerfed afterward, but it would still have the benefits of making the dragon buff a better bonus regardless of what champions you are picking.

14 Comments

SmokingPuffin4 votes

6% more damage dealt is actually way way more damage than +6% AD/AP. Would snowball much harder. That's not a good thing, considering how Riot is already struggling with excessive first dragon snowball.

More to the point, the ratio buff has different scaling properties than the damage buff. Early game, most of your damage comes from base damage on abilities. Late game, most of your damage comes from ratios. This allows the AD/AP dragon buff to be more impactful late than early, which makes bagging a first dragon more of an investment than an immediate combat strength buff.

Knight Devout1 votes

I know. I wrote exactly that. Did you read the whole post or only the TL;DR? (No offense taken if you didn't, It's a long post :P ) I said that if this proves too strong they can then rebalance the %, or move the damage buff further down the line, however it would make the buff impartial and fair, instead of favoring damage dealers over fighters/tank/[anyone that doesn't stack ad or ap].

More to the point, the ratio buff has different scaling properties than the damage buff. Early game, most of your damage comes from base damage on abilities. Late game, most of your damage comes from ratios. This allows the AD/AP dragon buff to be more impactful late than early, which makes bagging a first dragon more of an investment than an immediate combat strength buff.

When you pick dragon, the message says "damage increase". It doesn't say "lategame investment". With Riot talking about clarity 24/7, what you stated it's the consequence of how the damage boost is handled, rather than the intended effect. You can argue about this, but unless you point me to a red post that says that the first dragonslayer stack it's made like that on purpose to be only effective lategame, I stand by my point.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

I know. I wrote exactly that. Did you read the whole post or only the TL;DR? (No offense taken if you didn't, It's a long post :P )

I read it. I was emphasizing the point because we know Riot is struggling with snowball levels in game today.

I said that if this proves too strong they can then rebalance the %, or move the damage buff further down the line, however it would make the buff impartial and fair, instead of favoring damage dealers over fighters/tank/[anyone that doesn't stack ad or ap].

I understand your design objective. I just think the cons outweigh the pros.

In particular, buffing base damages on bruisers is quite a scary concept. Bruisers get a ton of base damage in their kits.

When you pick dragon, the message says "damage increase". It doesn't say "lategame investment".

% damage increase is inherently worth more gold late game than early game. I don't see any clarity problem here.

With Riot talking about clarity 24/7, what you stated it's the consequence of how the damage boost is handled, rather than the intended effect. You can argue about this, but unless you point me to a red post that says that the first dragonslayer stack it's made like that on purpose to be only effective lategame, I stand by my point.

It's not supposed to be only effective lategame, but they intended it to be less snowbally than the gold reward for first dragon was. I don't have a red post handy on the topic, but this was a specific design goal stated in the preseason. It turns out to have been a failed design goal, which is why first stack was nerfed in 4.21.

That means that the "all damage increased by x%" version of the buff you want will probably need to be something more like 3%, which I don't think provides the feels you want.

Knight Devout1 votes

Then make it 3%: Otherwise, be content of the new meta of ranged toplaners and assassin midlaners, because if you think that 6% extra damage on bruisers is scary, while it isn't on assassins/mages, that's what you get.

It wouldn't change significantly the game for a 500 AP mid, it would affect more those who cannot build AD and AP. IF dragon is the cause of snowballing, then you have to nerf the first stack. REGARDLESS , what I proposed helps tanks and fighters to get back in the game.

But whatever dude, you don't get it. Or you are content with the "high popularity" of bruisers in competitive atm. EDIT: I don't want the "feel" of power, I just want to even out the scene between those who stacks rabaddon to the ceiling, and those who go frozen heart+Locket.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

Then make it 3%: Otherwise, be content of the new meta of ranged toplaners and assassin midlaners, because if you think that 6% extra damage on bruisers is scary, while it isn't on assassins/mages, that's what you get.

Ranged top laners are a function of top lane sustain. When sustain is high, we get bruiser lanes. When sustain is low, we get ranged tops. Has little to do with dragon changes. Nerfs to Doran's items are what removed bruiser tops from competitive play.

Assassin mids and mage mids get comparable benefit from dragon buff. I don't see how new dragon buff changes the mid lane meta.

I think 3% all damage doesn't have good feels. At that level it's invisible power. Very hard to read that it does anything at all.

REGARDLESS , what I proposed helps tanks and fighters to get back in the game. But whatever dude, you don't get it. Or you are content with the "high popularity" of bruisers in competitive atm.

Admirable goal. Not the right way to do it.

Tanks do not need better scaling. They need to not suck in lane and they need to be able to kill jungle monsters at comparable speeds to the other junglers.

Bruisers didn't start getting pushed out of top lane because dragon changed. This has been a trend since spring.

I happen to think that many bruisers need reworks to give them more tools to fight back. The standard bruiser kit of gap closer, cc, sustain, steroid is doesn't have enough outplay potential and relies too much on having more stats than the other guy.

EDIT: I don't want the "feel" of power, I just want to even out the scene between those who stacks rabaddon to the ceiling, and those who go frozen heart+Locket.

Offense must outscale defense. In a world where building tanky gets you as much late game power as building damage, games stop ending on time and we only play hyperscaling champions.

Knight Devout1 votes

So you want to grind out tank junglers and aggressive junglers in "I clear the jungle better than you"? I don't know if that's the best possible way. IMHO a 50% damage reduction from monsters, so that juggernaut champions who get past the 20 minute mark can basically tank down a baron with shields while their team attacks them is still a good strategy (and that's what happen, only later in the game when tanks have significant resistances).

Offense must outscale defense.

True. But there is a certain line that is not supposed to be crossed, unless you want to see 5 people building full damage. For example, against a Yi and Yasuo, no matter how much armor you have , you will always feel weak due to their true damage OR massive arpen. However, against, for example, a Talon/Zed, you are never supposed to be a "viable target" just because they happen to have last whisper,their jungler had black cleaver, and , guess what, they are ignoring 58% of your armor. One thing is "Offense outscales defense" in terms of itemization/strategy , because you have more available stats (AD+AS+Crits), better scalings (Rabaddon+voidstaff+penetration items), and strategy wise you can always ditch the fulltank and go on the squishies once the cc has been used. Another thing is "offense IGNORES defense" because arpen is easily available and stackable, so why should I pick tanks in the first place?.

Anyway, i stand by my point.

All the critic you moved to my idea are actually present on live version, with the only difference that the live version favors AP/AD stacking over flat damage. You can always tune things out so that on average the damage bonus caps at, say 200 bonus AD/400 AP And

Tanks do not need better scaling. They need to not suck in lane and they need to be able to kill jungle monsters at comparable speeds to the other junglers.

Requires "other junglers" like Lee sin to be nerfed . Because you can't bring tanks to their level, you only multiply the problem you pose in the next argument.

The standard bruiser kit of gap closer, cc, sustain, steroid is doesn't have enough outplay potential and relies too much on having more stats than the other guy.

Kuroi861 votes

That's not a good thing, considering how Riot is already struggling with excessive first dragon snowball.

Except dragon isn't the cause of snowballing, it's simply a symptom. Typically the first team to get dragon has a strong early game, better ward coverage, and/or has already won a significant fight in mid/bot lane. Whoever has the tactical advantage prior to dragon simply makes their advantage a bit sturdier by gaining dragon.

SmokingPuffin2 votes

{quoted}

Except dragon isn't the cause of snowballing, it's simply a symptom. Typically the first team to get dragon has a strong early game, better ward coverage, and/or has already won a significant fight in mid/bot lane. Whoever has the tactical advantage prior to dragon simply makes their advantage a bit sturdier by gaining dragon.

That's false. Snowballing went up significantly in the preseason. Riot explicitly attributed this to dragon in 4.21 patch notes.

Kuroi861 votes

Riot attributes it as one culprit. Having run numbers, I seriously cannot see how they could believe that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the dragon slayer buff isn't strong, it is ridiculously strong. But if your team gets it early on, then the numbers the first buff grants are going to be along the lines of five or less AD/AP.

Even at 8% AD/AP you needed at least 125 AD and 250 AP before you got the same benefits of a Long Sword or Amp Tome. These numbers are feasible. But people say that is snowball? That's like saying whoever gets BF sword in lane in guaranteed to win lane and game. =/

Again, I still say dragon slayer is strong, but early game snowballing just doesn't fit the numbers.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

Even at 8% AD/AP you needed at least 125 AD and 250 AP before you got the same benefits of a Long Sword or Amp Tome. These numbers are feasible. But people say that is snowball? That's like saying whoever gets BF sword in lane in guaranteed to win lane and game. =/

Phreak made exactly this point the first time the "isn't first dragon buff too snowbally?" question came up. That was Riot's rationale for the buff not to be OP.

Turns out they were wrong. It's not easy to explain why 8% buff is too strong -- intuitively I buy your argument -- but quantitatively it clearly is resulting in a higher win rate for first dragon team than the old dragon was.

Kuroi861 votes

It's been pointed out by a few players already and I agree with it.

Typically the first team to get dragon has a strong early game, better ward coverage, and/or has already won a significant fight in mid/bot lane. Whoever has the tactical advantage prior to dragon simply makes their advantage a bit sturdier by gaining dragon.

SmokingPuffin1 votes

This isn't a new factor, though.

The team that takes first dragon in 4.20 is more likely than the team that takes first dragon in 4.19 to win the game. Why do you think that is?

Kuroi861 votes

Why do you think that is?

The mentality surrounding the new buff.

Remember when Vayne was seen almost everywhere? I remember all too many matches where bot lane would derp, give up first blood, then... "GGSurrender@20 Vayne fed now."

This off of one kill...

People tend to refuse to admit they are human, they make mistakes. A lot of "OP" threads arise not from an item or champion actually being overpowered, but from the player refusing to admit they either made a mistake or simply got out played by a more skilled player.

FyshinaTux2 votes

First Dragon stack shouldn't even give a damage boost. It's an unfair advantage for the team that gets drake first, meaning the team that didn't get Drake has to dance HARDCORE if they're going to win the next drake fight and get that damage boost to even the playing field.

More from Gameplay

More by Knight Devout